They do not give drugs to the druggies. The druggies bring their own drugs to the facility, where they get medical assistance a lot faster if they OD, where they are checked out and treated for various ailments such as infections, where they are counselled about matters such as HIV, and where they are assisted in getting their lives together and encouraged to move toward getting off drugs, including an on-site residential drug rehab.
The Court looked at that and concluded that the Feds had the jurisdiction, but the application of the law itself violated the Charter.
So there’s an Andrea Horwath ad above my head as I type this. That’s some clever robots running the dope :-P.
Clifford Olsen dead at 71. Puts an end on a really dark chapter in Canada.
He was dead back at post 565…
I was following the Insite case closely, since I did my Master’s Thesis in a related area (the health implications of laws that criminalise sex work - which is also topical in a Canadian legal context). Apart from the decision itself, and the fact that it was 9-0, I also thought it was great that the court mandated the Minister to grant the exemption. It could very well have hid behind the discretionary aspect of the exemption power, and hedged with a declaratory order.
Well, he’s STILL dead. I’ll take that as my consolation prize. 
I’m not sure what the efficacy of drug policy has to do with what is or isn’t legal.
Harsher drug sentencing laws, for instance, are legal, but they won’t work.
I’m unsure why you think the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction. It handles appeals arising from provincial Courts of Appeal, on all kinds of matters. See sections 35-36 of the Supreme Court Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. S-26 (link here).
Practically speaking, this means the SCC has the jurisdiction to handle whatever arises from a provincial Court of Appeal: contractual disputes, family law questions, estate issues, criminal law, constitutional law, tort law, and so on. In short, the SCC is not constitutionally-restricted to federal matters; rather, as the ultimate court of appeal, it has jurisdiction over all legal questions in Canada, including the Insite one.
Not a fan of this. I’d rather see the money go towards treatment . But then at least
they’re not serving raw milk.
My understanding is that treatment is also available if the addicts want it. I do approve of this - it deals with the reality of drug abuse, not a fantasyland of only treating addicts.
Now, if we could just get government-run brothel facilities going so sex workers would be better protected…
The glory of the Ontario nanny state… The people who were buying the milk know exactly what they are doing, and I would have an issue if they were going to give the raw milk to infants or children. However, grown adults know the issues and should be allowed some goddamn freedom to make choices.
Seriously, is there any more intrusive government than the Ontario government?
Hey, I’m not claiming to know anything about this stuff. I appreciate being steered on the correct course.
The Ontario NDP bus followed me up Highway 48 this evening. At The Curve, where Sutton High Street joins and the highway turns east, it passed me and continued on its way. I wonder where it was going…
Oh kids are drinking raw milk as well. The government has no problem if the farmer himself drinks the milk or serves it to his kids. Which he does.
The problem they have is when it’s served to “other” people. Here’s where it goes into lets find fucking Waldo land.
If you own the cow you can drink the raw milk. Period, according to the Ontario government. So what this farmer did legally; had people that wanted the raw milk, collectively purchase the cow. With the farmer taking care of the cow and then distributed the milk. These are consenting, non-heroin consuming adults.
They still went after him.
Right out of Public Servants Gone Wild Video.
Why stop there if this is about the health of people, specifically heroin users.
Street heroin can and often is filled with all sorts of impurities. Some of it bad for a persons health. Why not get the clean heroin and distribute/sell it to the addicts from Insite. Wouldn’t that be the next logical step ?
If not, why not ?
Don’t get me wrong. I think some drugs should be legalized. Like marijuana. But I don’t think heroin should be one of them, and we should never turn a legal blind eye away from it.
Besides, it’s been standard practice for some time now when Police arrest heroin users to offer them treatment some point during the detention process, if the services are available of course.
So I’d prefer government money go to treatment centres where they don’t allow people to shoot up.
But then that’s just me.
Beaverton?
That’s a great idea.
It is.
I’m kind of torn on the issue. One one hand, I’m not a big fan of illegal recreational drugs, so I’d like to see them clamped down on. (Or made legal.) But on the other, I don’t want to see an addict put him- or herself in jeopardy with questionable drugs or infected syringes because of the fear of the law. And if something does go wrong, I’d like somebody to be on scene to help. Insite offers this.
I remember when Ontario slashed the price of cigarettes in half in order to combat cross-border smuggling (imported Canadian cigarettes were a quarter or so the Ontario price in New York State, and smugglers were making fortunes taking Canadian cigarettes legally exported to New York–thus free of Canadian and Ontarian excise and sales taxes–back to Ontario, and reselling them in Ontario for half the in-store Ontario price). But the Ontario government coupled its price slash with an increased anti-smoking campaign that was relentless; and undoubtedly led to Ontario becoming smoke-free in 2004.
Could this work in BC, and elsewhere? The idea that if you absolutely need to shoot up, you have a safe place to do so; but coupled with an anti-drug message that makes everybody think twice before even starting on drugs?
Actually the next logical step is heroin assisted treatment, where addicts are given the drug in a controlled environment as part of a maintenance and gradual detoxification programme. This is in place in a number of countries in Europe and has proven effective in keeping heroin users alive, keeping them in employment and out of crime and helping them detox safely, without appearing to encourage people to become heroin users.
It is isn’t it ?
They should be excempt from the smoking by-laws as well on the premises since they’re addicted after all and we wouldn’t want them smoking outside in the winter.